Compare brand name and generic percocet. Percocet withdrawal symptoms. Patriots percocet addiction buy. Percocet. How do you snort percocet. Percocet effects….

Hydrocodone….

Tramadol….

Are you sure about parts and engines being imported?

Honda recently built a $100 million transmission plant in Tallapoosa, GA. Honda claims it purchases about $18 billion in goods annually from North American suppliers.

Nissan's Decherd, TN, engine plant has been open for ten years. It now produces more engines than any plant in Nissan's global network.

Toyoda Gosei North America Group just announced plans to build a factory in Batesville, MS, to supply parts to the new Toyota vehicle assembly plant near Tupelo. This will be Toyoda Gosei's sixth U.S. parts plant.

Hyundai is going to build a transmission plant in West Point, GA, to supply its assembly plant in Montgomery, AL.

The Charleston, SC, plant of Behr America, a subsidiary of Germany's Behr GmbH & Co, produces radiators and other parts for BMW's Spartenburg, SC, vehicle plant. Behr is one of nearly 100 South Carolina suppliers to that plant.

These are just a few examples I quickly found. I'm sure there are dozens more. The vehicle assembly plants of foreign auto companies have created thousands of jobs at local suppliers.

I am a woman. And I do. LOL.

Second the union is as political a machine as is politics itself and we cannot blame the people working for the actions of their self interested organization.

So is a corporation. A union is a corporation in fact.

New job creation for the 1997-2007 period was +1.6 million for Texas and -10,400 for Ohio. Net domestic migration was +667,000 for Texas and -362,000 for Ohio. Some of the reasons given were that Texas has no state income tax, less unionization, and a survey shows Ohio third from the bottom in "economic competitiveness". There is more.

Really?

Anyway.

After listening to some more politics, I have come to the conclusion that arguing about NAFTA is akin to the debates about why the Titanic sunk. Interesting, but of no real value.

Blue collar America will continue to deteriorate, the rich will get richer, and eventually the political blowback will cause some change.

Politics is a pendulum, and perhaps the best we can hope for is that the swings are not too wild.

"Yes, but then I go to another country where I'm exposed to an even greater, previously unimaginable level of BS."

Unfortunately you are again correct. I have done my share of moving around the world and have had the good fortune to see first hand, up close and personal, a variety of different governments and the people that live with them. I did not live in those places with blinders on, and I can tell that you have not as well.

This creates a paradox in how I view our own government here, on the one hand I can appreciate that no one in my family is forced to spend an entire day looking for firewood to prepare the evening meal and maybe heat the hut for awhile in the cold evening. Furthermore, as I do not live near Watts or South Central L.A., I do not fear that a significant number of my neighbors will take up machetes in the night and come sweeping through my corner of the town killing everyone that isn't "them". I know they are out "there", but I don't even really fear the violent left wing radical kooks like ALF, ELF, EF, or our home grown anarchist movement.

So, I agree that of the choices the USA is still the place that offers the longest leash and the most comfortable collar of all.

Now, the other side of the coin that creates the paradox is that I also know that our corporate government has been allowed, nay even encouraged, to wander far far away from the foundation of its constitutional charter. So, I know with dead certainty that life here could be so much better, so much more productive, and free if people weren't so docile about wearing the collar and tolerating the leash.

While I do not, per se, fear the individual actions of my fellow man here in this nation, I do fear their collective action, especially that as advocated by such as muirduck and ilk. My worst fear if of the corporate government of the USA, and I fear the meek docile acceptance of that corporations actions by the common person. I fear the unquestioning acceptance by the people of its lies, distortions, and facile proclamations.

muirduck can not see, and asks me, “What yoke?”, it is the collar of having every single financial transaction you make being available and accessed by a rouge collection agency of jack booted thugs known as the IRS. It is the collar of the financial industry cooperating in those efforts by pushing us more and more to a cashless society where not even I can escape the placing of that collar. (I go into my favorite liquor store here in Houston and at the checkout counter I am asked, “Cash or regular?” I see it as unwitting cooperative conditioning to accept the collar.) It is the collar of being told that you must pay a tax that contributes to school but not to be able to choose the school without forfeiting the value of what you paid. It is the collar that has/is being placed on your child at birth with the hospitals insisting that you submit a form for a SSN for that child before it leaves the hospital. It is the collar we placed by watching the events at Ruby Ridge and the squashing of the Weaver family and doing nothing. It is the collar of watching the attack and murder of the Branch Davidians at Mt. Carmel in the open and on our TV screens and doing nothing at the time or insisting on justice in the aftermath even though the government lies were so evident. If ever there was a test case to see what the American public would tolerate, this was it. It is the collar placed by each county sheriff across the nation meekly accepting the dominance of federal thugs instead of knowing the laws and insisting on them being properly applied, as is his job. It is the collar of ignorance that allows people to accept the conventional wisdom about the law and never dig to see what the laws actually are.

I fear the Patriot Act and its mandated intrusions into our daily life. I fear the leash of the “Real ID” and our inability to travel freely without having documentation to answer the call, “papers please”. I fear recent Supreme court decisions (participated in by members left and right) that permit any “badge toter” to arrest you at any provocation or hint of resistance to his/her demands regardless of how out of line or unreasonable those demands may be. I fear the arbitrary power that gives people who in real life can’t pour piss out of a boot without having the instructions printed on the heel. I fear the realization that the leash is becoming increasingly shorter. I fear the cooperation of other nations in the administration of that collar and leash. “Where ya gonna run to?”

I fear the fact that when I write like this so many, even patrons of this cafe who you would like to think are above average in intellect, who will read my words and think, “What a kook!”

Yes I am a kook, I am an idealist who actually believes that you, I, and all others are individually free, and I know that no where else on Earth is it better; however, I see this one sinking fast. No, I think we’ll be rich for a long long time in spite of the Hillarys, Obamas, and McCains; but, we will enjoy it exactly the way they want us to….don’t step out of line.

I agree that people and resources get re-deployed more efficiently as a result of free trade. But I think the reason they get redeployed is to provide goods and services at a lower cost. The reason for weeding out inefficiency is to reduce costs.

What benefit does lower cost output provide? Some trade opponents believe it increases the wealth of business owners. But competition quickly reduces such returns to owners, and the end result is lower prices to consumers of those goods and services.

Identifying exactly how the workers of an inefficient factory were redeployed might be a good research subject. But I think it would grossly understate the value of free trade. It is the redeplyment of consumer dollars following lower prices – and the resulting increase in standard of living – that accounts for the largest benefit of free trade, IMO.

Thanks for interpreting my words the way I would want them interpreted. I hope that catches on.
To sum up: I am on vacation with a lady and I will not look up numbers to compete with Don's. But I'll say that the unemployment rate alone is not conclusive, even if my original comment draws the obvious complaint that the person I have just drawn into the labor force [the wife] probably didn't count toward the unemployment rate because she likely wasn't participating in the labor force. [Then again, Angry Bear will tell you that labor force participation is more important than LFP.]

I don't think that reduced prices for consumer goods/services and inputs accounts for all the benefits of trade. The people and resources that are freed up from inefficient industries get re-employed more efficiently elsewhere, producing more wealth for employees and for owners. In mercantilist parlance, we get "export opportunities", "generating jobs" (and profits) for people and companies in the U.S.

So what I am interested in is material to make a stronger argument. Particularly, it would be good to be able to describe in human terms the harm that would results from opting out of NAFTA (and I don't just mean that consumer items would be more expensive).

The single biggest source of BS is women, stay clear!

Bottom line is that they're not as skilled as they think they are for this economy for the price they're demanding. Not only that, but "unions" are toxic to management period.

LOL, God help me, but you see it, and it is BS, isn't it?

Yes, but then I go to another country where I'm exposed to an even greater, previously unimaginable level of BS. My life has become all about BS minimization.

I have never been a union member and I will never be a union member. So, I have not walked in those moccasins. However, both my parents were forced to join unions in the past, so they have walked in those moccasins. My father has come to despise unions so much that for the past nearly three decades he is the only employee in his organization who refuses to join the union. Fortunately, he is very highly skilled and a bit unique, so the union has been unable to force him to join.

first the work of union members is not analogous to working behind the counter at starbucks, they are skilled craftsmen.

While some union members are highly skilled (like my dad), the unionized cashiers and baggers in the grocery store aren't.

Second the union is as political a machine as is politics itself and we cannot blame the people working for the actions of their self interested organization.

Why shouldn't an organization which justifies its existence by claiming to represent its members be held accountable for its actions by said members? And why shouldn't others hold the members accountable for an organization they elected to speak in their name? This is the problem with collectivism. The leaders of the collective will do what they desire and the collective will be…well, collectively held responsible.

Besides that, unions are simply labour monopolies which ultimately hurt labour. What about the guy who doesn't get membership? What about the unemployed? Since the unemployed aren't paying union dues, the union leaders couldn't care less about them. So what if higher wages for the union members lead to less overall employment? At least the union leaders get more income from which to extract dues.

to be clear I mean the mission statement of union work was to produce better quality goods and have a superior workforce due to the incentive of higher wages and the organization as a whole able to train and produce highly skilled workers.

The mission statement laughable. The incentive of higher wages exists without unions – and is usually killed by unions. There is heavy competition among employers for highly skilled labour and they will bid up the price for the most desirable in the labour pool. Workers don't need labour unions to develop skills. They will develop skills in response to the incentive of higher compensation for the development of those skills. And they can do all that without paying juicy dues to union bosses.

Brian, you seem like an open and honest guy and I don't mean to attack you or labour in general. but you said it yourself: "let us not disregard union labor altogether, people will pay a premium if the product is far superior." The workers in the union may have superior skills and people will pay a premium for a superior product. However, unions prevent people from paying a premium for superior skills, talent and work ethic and force a premium for mediocrity.

As a union member and alternate shop steward I understand the situation possibly a bit clearer than some who have posted comments like "overpaid for what they do", before the huffing and puffing starts understand I see my duty as informing my brothers and sisters that our jobs are not to last forever and we do need to be cognizant of change and combat it with education. I have no problem with free trade and see it as a possible method to world peace.

Having said that, there are two issues to understand; first the work of union members is not analogous to working behind the counter at starbucks, they are skilled craftsmen. It is possible that any person can be trained to insert slot A into slot B, but it is as erroneous to assume the job so simplistic as is assuming Free trade hurts the wealth of the nation. Second the union is as political a machine as is politics itself and we cannot blame the people working for the actions of their self interested organization.

My theory as to possible increase in union jobs during said time period is the forced hand dealt to companies filling positions that may not had the need by a retaliating union organization. It is a tactic I suffered through years ago when first let into a specific union, the jobs were forced by tactics I won't explain but in the end it lead to more layoffs and many angry workers, ripe for political fuel, just the sort of mob union officials and politicians need to further their self interested cause.

I am not in favor of these tactics because it is the worker who loses, not only a job but now suffers persecution from those claiming they are not worth the wage and perhaps feeble minded boobs. In the case of GM and Ford I blame the executive decision making, it was their arrogance and failure to compete with better machines, complete lack of innovation. The worker will do whatever they are told to do, build a gas guzzler, you got it, payday on friday.

It would interest me to see the numbers of new union membership during this time period, and if my theory is correct, it would have risen slightly higher than average. Surely we can all understand the origination of the union mentality, but like all things went to far, and unfortunately the price is being paid now, but let us not disregard union labor altogether, people will pay a premium if the product is far superior. That was the mission statement of the unions I belong(ed) to, if it can return to that(and I will do my best to reach a position to help steer said direction) unions can compete in a natural justified way in todays global economy.